Share:


Process in contemporary visual art as a paradigm shift in the visual art education: perspective of creativity

    Sonja Vuk Affiliation
    ; Maja Bosnar Affiliation
DOI:

Abstract

The authors discuss contemporary visual art, its creation processes and their implementation in art education in primary and secondary/grammar school. Changing the paradigm of studying from “fine to visual arts” within art education is a process itself. Visual art, which involves a participatory and new media art, is also concerned with processes that establish unique relationships between subjects and their effect on the real life of the participants or audience. It is no longer enough to deal with aesthetic concepts, but it is necessary to use art forms to create everyday life, and deal with ethical concepts. Transferring these processes into education connects students’ creative activities and their everyday life context, so that they can learn how to create social and personal relationships by using images. Experimental research in grammar school affirms the importance of teaching topics as are socially and politically engaged art or artistic activism, mediated by new media. Action research in elementary school affirms proposed style of art education as an acceptable way of transferring the way of thinking from visual art, especially a participatory and new media art, to the process of education as a discovering problems in society and offering solutions represented by visual forms.

Keyword : art education, contemporary visual art, creativity, primary school, process, secondary/ grammar school

How to Cite
Vuk, S., & Bosnar, M. (2021). Process in contemporary visual art as a paradigm shift in the visual art education: perspective of creativity. Creativity Studies, 14(1), 99-111. http://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2021.12632
Published in Issue
Mar 25, 2021
Abstract Views
103
PDF Downloads
95

This work is licensed under a .

References

Alsaggar, M. A., & Shukran, Q. A.-K. (2014). Interdisciplinary art education. International Journal of Elementary Education, 3(3), 81–85. http://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijeedu.20140303.15

Baudrillard, J. (2006). Inteligencija zla ili pakt lucidnosti. Naklada Ljevak d.o.o.

Bergold, J., & Thomas, S. (2012). Participatory research methods: a metodological approach in motion. Forum: Qualitative Social Research. Socialforschung, 13(1). http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/1801/3335

Bering, K., & Niehoff, R. (2015). Visual proficiency: A perspective on art education. Athena Verlag.

Bosnar, M. (2018). Suvremena umjetnost u obrazovanju: uloga novih medija u nastavi likovne kulture ugimn azijama. Akademija likovnih umjetnosti.

Buschkuhle, C.-P. (Hrsg.). (2003). Perspektiven künstlerischer Bildung. Salon Verlag.

Carroll, N. (1998). A philosophy of mass art. Oxford University Press.

Freedman, K. (2003). Teaching visual culture: curriculum, aesthetics, and the social life of art. Teachers College Press.

Groys, B. (2006). Učiniti stvari vidljivima: strategije suvremene umjetnosti. Muzej suvremene umjetnosti.

Helfand, M., Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2016). The Four-C model of creativity: culture and context. In V. P. Glăveanu (Ed.), The Palgrave handbook of creativity and culture research. Series: Palgrave Handbooks (pp. 15–36). Palgrave Macmillan. http://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-46344-9_2

Kettel, J. (Hg.). (2004). Künstlerische Bildung nach Pisa. Internationale Gesellschaft der Bildenden Kunste (IGBK)/Landesakademie Schlos Rotenfels (Hgg.), u.a. mit Ch. Biehler, Ch. Jurgens, I. Merkel, K.-J. Pazzini, & H. Seitz. Athena Verlag.

Kirby, A. (2009). Digitmodernism: How new technologies dismantle the postmodern and reconfigure our culture. The Continuum International Publishing Group.

Milevska, S. (2006). Participatory art: a paradigm shift from objects to subjects. Eurozine. http://www.eurozine.com/participatory-art/?pdf

Pfeil, M., Seitz, H., & Vogt, Ch. (2010). Be unique, be open, be art. In Building bridges, breaking borders: urban culture and youth. Urban culture and youth in Berlin and beyond, or how to do things with art (pp. 51–127). SWP.

Read, H. (2002). To hell with culture, and other essays on art and society. Routledge.

Republika Hrvatska. Ministarstvo znanosti, obrazovanja i športa. (2011). Nacionalni okvirni kurikulum za predškolski odgoj i obrazovanje te opće obvezno i srednjoškolsko obrazovanje. Republika Hrvatska. Ministarstvo znanosti, obrazovanja i športa.

Republika Hrvatska. Ministarstvo znanosti, obrazovanja i športa. (2006). Nastavni plan i program za osnovnu školu. Narodne novine: službeni list Republike Hrvatske. http://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/full/dodatni/129167.pdf

Ritchart, R., Church, M., & Morrison, K. (2011). Making things visible: how to promote engagement, understanding, and independance for all learners. Jossey-Bass.

Stanković, M. (2014). Participativne prakse u srpskoj savremenoj umetnosti. Kultura, 143, 297–318. http://doi.org/10.5937/kultura1443297s

Strehovec, J. (2003). Umetnost interneta: umetniško delo in besedilo v času medmrežja. Študentska založba.

Stutz, U. (2008). Performative research in art education: scenes from the seminar “Exploring performative rituals in city space”. Forum: Qualitative Social Research. Socialforschung, 9. http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/411/894

Šuvaković, M. (2012). Pojmovnik teorije umetnosti. Orion Art.

Truman, S. (2011). A generative framework for creative learning: a tool for planning creative-collaborative tasks in the classroom. Border Crossing: Transnational Working Papers, 1101. http://doi.org/10.33182/bc.v1i1.518

Vogrinc, J. (2008). Kvalitativno raziskovanje na pedagoškem področju. Univerza v Ljubljani.

Vuk, S., Tacol, T., & Vogrinc, J. (2015). Adoption of the creative process according to the immersive method. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 5(3), 51–71.